Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Most Powerful Aircraft  
User currently offlineFunflyer From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 866 posts, RR: 0
Posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 5086 times:

In your opinion what aircraft is the loudest/most powerful?



For me the loudest is the super 80


The Most powerful is an A330.



And yes I have been on a 757


Who cares about status?
46 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineN863DA From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 48 posts, RR: 5
Reply 1, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 5038 times:

If you think an MD-80 is loudest, you've never heard a 707-420 with Conways, a DC-8-60, a VC-10 and those extremely loud Conways (as with the 707-420), or for that matter, the DH.106 Comet.

For power, I have no idea, really... by pure numbers, the 777-200 is one of the most powerful aircraft. For feeling, I guess a lightly-loaded 757-200 seems like it just rockets off of the ground.

N 8 6 3 D A


User currently offlineFlyf15 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 5016 times:

Aside from far out answers like "the space shuttle.."

The An-225 is the most powerful airplane out there. Not sure for noise, but I've heard the Tupolev Bear is extremely loud. B-1Bs at full afterburner aren't the quietest planes in the sky either.  Big thumbs up


User currently offlineMD11LuxuryLinr From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1385 posts, RR: 14
Reply 3, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 4989 times:

I remember the 727s and 732s from the seventies and eighties being extremely loud. Growing up 5 miles from the airport, right in the approach/departure end of PHL's main runways, our house was always rumbling and rattling whenever those birds would "sweep", by especially on departure of course. Damn I miss those days!

As far as most powerful, it has to be the MD11 with a trio of 4462s.
 Big thumbs up



Caution wake turbulence, you are following a heavy jet.
User currently offlineVS340 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 4966 times:

The old 732's are definately some of the loudest and they sound great, the newer model 737's just arent the same, im going to miss hearing the 200's roar out when they are gone

most powerful commercial jet would definately have to be the 777


User currently offlineL.1011 From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 2209 posts, RR: 9
Reply 5, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 4963 times:

Today's widebodies (most powerful engine available-total thrust at full power)
747-400: 253,200
747-400ER: 253,200
777-300ER: 230,600
A340-600: 224,000
777-200LR: 220,200
A340-500: 212,000
777-300: 195,800
777-200ER: 195,800
777-200: 154,000
A330-200: 144,000
A330-300: 144,000
A340-200: 136,000
A340-300: 136,000
767-400ER: 127,000
767-200ER: 126,600
767-300ER: 126,600
A couple interesting observations- All 777s lead the competing Airbus in total thrust. A330s lead the initial A340s in engine power as well. This is odd to me because the A340 was supposed to be the longer-ranged airplane.






User currently offlineMCIB757 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 280 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 4942 times:

The 737-200 is a very loud aircraft and so it the 727.

For power that you feel on takeoff, one of the front-runners has to be the 717, you virtually rocket off the runway, its great and I love it.



"God bless catastrophe..."
User currently offlineBR715-A1-30 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 4925 times:

A Lightly loaded 717 with full takeoff power has got to be the most powerful on T/O.

User currently offlineDazed767 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 5498 posts, RR: 51
Reply 8, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 4909 times:

A lightly loaded P&W 757 will throw you back in your seat.

Just flew on my first 777 Wednesday, we were completely full, but it's still one heck of a powerful plane, I was impressed!


User currently offlineHlywdCatft From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 5321 posts, RR: 6
Reply 9, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 4863 times:

<>

You ever seen an A340 take off with those 4 hair dryers under its wings?


User currently offlineN766UA From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 8366 posts, RR: 23
Reply 10, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 4861 times:

Loudest? NASA's 707, still with the old engines.


This Website Censors Me
User currently offlineHlywdCatft From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 5321 posts, RR: 6
Reply 11, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 4858 times:

btw my post was in response to L.1011

User currently offlineSSTjumbo From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 4814 times:

The An-225 is pushed by six 55,000 lbs thrust engines I believe. That'd be 330,000 lbs of thrust alltogether. Why hasn't that been mentioned?

User currently offlineNWA742 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 4718 times:

The An-225 is pushed by six 55,000 lbs thrust engines I believe. That'd be 330,000 lbs of thrust alltogether. Why hasn't that been mentioned?

I think the focus is mainly on commercial airliners if you didn't notice. Also, the An-225 has been mentioned, see Reply 2.

----------------------------

For most powerful takeoff, in my history of travel it would have to be a lightly-loaded 744. I was on a Northwest red-eye a few years back, the 744 was replacing a DC-9 for some reason, and we had probably 20 passengers max. Since it was a short flight, they probably didn't tip off the tanks either. I swear that was the most powerful takeoff in my history of flying. A passenger across the aisle from me was asking me jokingly if this was a 747 or a fighter jet.

Also, the 717 and 757 are rockets even when fully loaded. A fully loaded 744 takes awhile to rotate, but whenever that starts, you still can't seem to believe that thing's power. The 777 is one heck of a powerful aircraft too, but I don't think it matches the 744.




-NWA742


User currently offlineGotAirbus From Singapore, joined May 2001, 851 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 4661 times:

HlywdCatft

You ever seen an A340 take off with those 4 hair dryers under its wings?


ROTFLOL!! That made my day!

Anyways, I was in a CX A343 and takeoff was "elegant", to put it into words. The rest of the jets either have your head push down to your stomach as it takes off.

(gotAirbus?)

Virgin Atlantic A340-600: 4 engines 4 long-haul
Virgin Atlantic A340-300: 4 engines 4 long takeoff.



(gotAIRBUS?) - (Got Commonality?) - (Have A Nice Flight!)
User currently offlineNWA742 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 4604 times:

ROTFLOL!! That made my day!

Anyways, I was in a CX A343 and takeoff was "elegant", to put it into words. The rest of the jets either have your head push down to your stomach as it takes off.


Why are we even discussing the A343 in a thread "Most powerful aircraft"?

Although it's certainly a good, elegant looking bird, it's power-to-weight ratio is one of the lowest in modern airliners, hence it's takeoff performance is nothing to gawk at.

Also, you say "rest of the jets push your head down to your stomach as it takes off" as if it's a bad thing. I think most of us love that feeling, because it really demonstrates that you're on a powerful machine. I wouldn't want to feel like I was riding in an air-bus  Big grin



-NWA742


User currently offlineBackfire From Germany, joined Oct 2006, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 4583 times:

A330s lead the initial A340s in engine power as well. This is odd to me because the A340 was supposed to be the longer-ranged airplane.

If you lose an engine on an A340, you still have 75% of the thrust remaining. If you lose one on an A330, it drops to just 50%. Not unreasonable, therefore, to bolt more powerful engines on the twin.


User currently offlineKevs From Australia, joined Jun 2003, 46 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 4574 times:

I don't have any travel experience on any A330 or A340

But based on my previous travels on SQ 744 and 772,
The 772 take off is more impressive, I was like sitting in
a sports car with my body pushed back into the seat..

I also tried both A320 and A321, there take offs are
more gentle... is A330 or A340 have the same 'gentle'
take-off?

From all my travel experience with A320, A321, B744, B772
I can tell those Airbuses provided a more comfortable cabin
especially with much less engine noise.
However, Boeing jets give me a feel like I am really flying!!
I like to fly and I like it raw!!!


User currently offlineNWA742 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 4571 times:

If you lose an engine on an A340, you still have 75% of the thrust remaining. If you lose one on an A330, it drops to just 50%. Not unreasonable, therefore, to bolt more powerful engines on the twin.

Also you must take in the factor that the A340 would be twice as likely to lose an engine over the A330. 4 vs. 2.

When it all comes down to one point, both 2 and 4 engined planes are about equal in terms of safety.



-NWA742


User currently offlineBackfire From Germany, joined Oct 2006, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 4542 times:

Also you must take in the factor that the A340 would be twice as likely to lose an engine over the A330


I guess that single-engined aircraft must therefore carry the least risk of engine failure.

So if an A340 loses three engines, it suddenly becomes twice as safe as an A330. Hmm...  Big grin


User currently offlineNWA742 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 4527 times:

I guess that single-engined aircraft must therefore carry the least risk of engine failure.

I don't know if that will work with singles. But when comparing 2 vs. 4 engined aircraft, the quad would be twice as likely to lose an engine because it has twice the engines operating at the same time. Simple as that.

So if an A340 loses three engines, it suddenly becomes twice as safe as an A330. Hmm...

How do you come to that?



-NWA742


User currently offlineKevs From Australia, joined Jun 2003, 46 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 4524 times:

I don't believe in those slogans like 4 engines 4 long haul..
in most case, those aircraft accidents are due to human factors rather
than mechanical problem, such as poor maintainence, human errors.....

4 engines, mean it doubles the chance of a human error to occurs when
compares with any 2 engines aircraft.


User currently offlineERJ135 From Australia, joined Nov 2000, 687 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 4473 times:

I don't mean to be flippant but just how common is a multiple engine failure?
I certainly wouldn't be saying that a four engined aircraft is more likely to suffer a shutdown at all, but in any case lets then hypothesize the likely scenario of a double engine failure and ask would you rather fly a 747 with 2 engines operating or a 777 with no engines after each has lost two?

But back to the original topic, what about Concorde? But then it's built for speed isn't it and not really all that powerful compared to a bulk freighter, so it must be the AN225, nothing flying produces as much power as it has to just to fly. But wait it has six engines! Can it keep all engines running long enough?

As for the A340? This aircraft is often the butt of jokes for the supposed reason that it has no power or insufficient power and it climbs slow and flies slower than some other aircraft. Funny enough I've never seen one unable to get of the ground for lack of power have you? So this fuel miser seems quite adequate for it's function. Is Thai really replacing 777 services with the new A340-600 because of engine reliability? Surely not!



I remember when the DC-3 was new!
User currently offlineXXXX10 From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2000, 777 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 4382 times:

The loudest aircraft on take of is without doubt Concorde

makes a 737-200 sound quiet


User currently offlineBuckfifty From Canada, joined Oct 2001, 1316 posts, RR: 19
Reply 24, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 4344 times:

Before anyone spews anymore nonsense, please have a read of this:

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Galaxy/7728/home.html

They teach entire university courses on this four vs. two engine argument. Which makes me wonder how people can give the best definitive argument on this topic in less than a paragraph.


25 Post contains images Ljungdahl : Beside the Concorde and Boeing 707, 400 series, the loudest aircrafts around were the BAC-111 and Trident, the reason they've not mentioned yet here m
26 HlywdCatft : I dont think that the 737-200 is that loud, although they have been Stage III Modified, but DL Express takes them off quite regularly over my place ne
27 ThirtyEcho : Don't have any numbers but the Grumman G-IV and G-V will really part your hair.
28 B752fanatic : If you are talking about powerful, Lets say B757-200. (Rolls Royce Engines).
29 Post contains links and images Luisinho : One day i scared to death, i was walking to the beach, in 1986, i was 8 years old, passing the top of runway 28 of FARO airport (LPFR), a british Airw
30 Backfire : NWA742: I was trying to be sarcastic, not serious. I spend much of my time with statistics, and I'm constantly amused by the "4 versus 2" debate becau
31 Deltadude8 : To determine the most powerful aircraft what you need to do is take the total thrust and divide it by the total number of avg. seats on the aircraft..
32 Post contains images EGGD : I don't know if that will work with singles. But when comparing 2 vs. 4 engined aircraft, the quad would be twice as likely to lose an engine because
33 L.1011 : DeltaDude8, the problem with that is that every airline has a different number of seats and use different engines. Thus, power-to-weight ratios vary w
34 NWA742 : Yes but an A330 is still more likely to lose 50% of its total engine power than the A340. True, but an A330 can operate under 50% power far more easie
35 Deltadude8 : L.1011...Way to go Captain Obvious! Notice how in my conclusion I stated that (quote)the MOST POWERFUL AIRCRAFT IN ***"DELTA AIR's FLEET"*** IS THE MD
36 NWA742 : Deltadude8, you should redo your calculations with the actual weight of the aircraft at MTOW, that will get you more realistic figures in terms of thr
37 SSTjumbo : NWA742, I think the focus is mainly on commercial airliners if you didn't notice. Also, the An-225 has been mentioned, see Reply 2. The An-225 is used
38 NWA742 : The An-225 is used in commercial applications, just not scheduled air carrier service. Thanks I was not aware of that. Also, please rephrain from usin
39 Bmacleod : I rememeber in the mid-80's and early '90s at Halifax (YHZ) before hushkitting when AirCanada DC-9s roared on takeoff. AC's 727s and Canadian (CP) 737
40 Cmckeithen : The new Aribus A380 when it comes out of production.
41 Sovietjet : Shame on you TUPOLEV! GET SCRAPPED Luisinho - Why don't you scream at the BAC111 like that? It can kill a girl in a Fiesta too but when the BAC111 too
42 Funflyer : I really dont think anyone remeber I said IN YOUR OPINON. There was no need for Stats.
43 SSTjumbo : Um, you need to lighten up and get a sense of humor, this is an online forum, not a business meeting. I was just poking a little sarcasm/humor at ya,
44 Carduelis : The BOAC Comet on one of it's proving/demo flights in Australia, took off, lightly loaded, and went into an almost vertical climb. Now that's power!
45 747400sp : It is the Boeing 747 400er 4 x 62000 lb trust engines until the airbus a380 4 x 70000 lb trust engines .
46 BDRules : I have been on a RR RB211 powered 752 from MAN to LGW with BY and the take-off run was out of this world. Very powerful. also MON A300-600 was impress
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Most Powerful Aircraft posted Sat Aug 9 2003 04:22:51 by Funflyer
Which Aircraft Has The Most Powerful Engine? posted Wed Jun 5 2002 14:06:22 by Kj76
The Most Common Aircraft... posted Mon Jun 19 2006 02:15:37 by N723GW
Most Diverse Aircraft Registrations. posted Mon Jan 2 2006 08:33:33 by YOWza
Most Recognizable Aircraft Pt.2 posted Fri Dec 16 2005 00:46:48 by IAH744
Most Succesfull Aircraft posted Wed Sep 21 2005 22:55:03 by Henpol747
What Is The Most Powerful Widebody Takeoff? posted Sun Dec 19 2004 15:49:48 by 747400sp
The Single Most-traded Aircraft Ever? posted Wed Mar 17 2004 23:31:19 by Nworlnsbearcub
The Most Powerful Take Off posted Fri Oct 3 2003 05:09:52 by Boeingflying31
The Most Successful Aircraft Family Ever posted Wed Sep 17 2003 16:36:11 by Osteogenesis